PREMIER SPONSOR
BRONZE SPONSOR
EXHIBITORS
Conference
Secretariat
Conferences and Events
PO Box 38951
Wellington Mail Centre
Tel: +64 4 589 0630
Email: risk@confer.co.nz
|
Speakers
Please find below keynote and seminar speakers.
 |
Jane
Diplock AO
BA (Hons) LLB DipEd (Sydney), Dip
Int. Law (ANU), FIPAA, FNZIM
Jane
Diplock has been the Chairman of the Securities Commission since 2001.
During that time Commission has been given additional responsibilities
and powers notably in enforcement of securities law and oversight of
securities markets. The Commission has also taken a higher
profile in education about securities and in international securities
regulation
Jane is also the Chairman of
the
Executive Committee of the International Organisation of Securities
Commissions (IOSCO). She was elected to that position in 2004 and was
re-elected for a third term in May 2008. She is a member of the Trustee
Appointments Advisory Group set up by the International Accounting
Standards Committee Foundation and a member of the Trans- Tasman
Leadership Forum.
Previously Jane was the
National Director, Infrastructure and Strategic Planning, and New South
Wales Regional Commissioner with the Australian Securities and
Investments Commission. She has also held various senior executive
positions with Westpac Banking Corporation and was the managing
director of the New South Wales Technical and Further
Education
Commission.
Risk
Assessment and Management in Financial Market Turmoil
The
global capital markets have witnessed the worst turbulence in recent
history as the effects of the sub-prime crisis, which commenced in the
US mortgage market, have reverberated around the world. New
Zealand hasn’t escaped the fallout from the credit crisis but our
circumstances are largely related to the property market. The
address examines the risks in the financial market and how they have
played out over recent months. It looks at the international
setting – what has been done, what can be done and the role of
regulators in helping to find cost-effective find solutions.
The
issues traversed include corporate governance, credit rating agencies,
credit risk transfer and issuer transparency.
|
 |
Dr
Deborah J Pretty
BA (Hons), DPhil (Oxon), AIRM, ARM
Principal, Oxford Metrica
Dr
Pretty is Principal of Oxford Metrica, a research and analytics firm
specialising in corporate reputation and international
investments. Deborah’s primary focus is on extreme events,
establishing connections between risk and shareholder value performance
for major quoted firms and hedge funds. For three years,
Deborah
was Marsh Research Fellow at the University of Oxford, where she
undertook extensive empirical research in strategic risk and
finance. Deborah has written numerous articles for academic
and
professional journals, and presents her research regularly
worldwide. Previously, Deborah worked as an Assistant
Director in
Sedgwick Oil & Gas and as a risk finance analyst with
Tillinghast-Towers Perrin in London and the US.
Seminar
1 - Thursday 6th November 10.40am
Reputation
Recovery from Extreme Events
Extensive
study of firms’ share prices following extreme events reveals a
dramatic divergence in firms’ ability to recover from crisis.
No
event is more extreme than that involving mass fatalities.
The
research presented in this session analyses over 100 fatal airline
crashes over the last decade and demonstrates that swift action,
communication and compassion are key to reputation and value
recovery. Prominent cases are presented which illustrate the
key
role of leadership in safeguarding the firm’s corporate reputation and
performance.
Keynote
Address - Friday 7th November 08.45am
Reputational
Turmoil in the Financial Sector
Trust
is a fragile asset. It is also a fundamental element of
financial
institutions’ branding and performance. Amid the ongoing
subprime
mortgage crisis and ensuing credit crunch, the reputation of many
financial institutions is in turmoil. A 10-year study on the
largest 100 asset managers demonstrates that confident leadership, open
and honest dialogue, transparency in reporting and compelling growth
prospects are the hallmarks of firms which have weathered their
reputation crises well. Insights are provided from high
profile
cases such as Bear Stearns, UBS and Société Générale.
Back to top
|
 |
Dr Dean Myburgh
Dean
Myburgh entered consultancy in 2006 after working at director level in
local government for 14 years. He holds Directorships in two
consultancies, 80-20 Options NZ Limited and Emergency Planning Limited
and has a keen interest in enhancing organisations’ resilience through
organisation development interventions. His consultancy
focuses
mainly in the areas of risk- and emergency management.
Dean
is a Fellow of the NZ Institute of Management, and has held senior
leadership roles in public and private sector organizations, both
within New Zealand and abroad. He has provided internal and
external consultancy services to organisations and was a member of the
Committee that prepared the NZ Handbook Risk Management for Local
Government (SNZ HB 4360:2000) for the Standards NZ Council.
Dean’s
consulting focus is the facilitation of strategic and operational
decision-making related to organisational change management, process
improvement, and risk and emergency management. He has authored ‘The
Risk Management Toolbox – A Guide to Facilitating Risk Thinking and
Problem-solving in Organisations using the Risk Management Diagnostic
Survey (RMDS)’ and publications related to the Resilient Organisations
research programme. Dean has ties nationally to consultants
across New Zealand and with major Australian consultancies.
Dean’s consulting and advisory roles include:
Risk
Consultant - NZ Society of Risk Management (refer Consultants
-www.risksociety.org.nz/)
Accredited Supplier to the
NZ Business Excellence Foundation (refer
www.nzbef.org.nz/consultingservices_consultants.htm)
HBDI® Certified Practitioner
and member of the Herrmann International global network
Business Mentor with
Business Mentors New Zealand.
Member
of the Resilient Organisations Steering Group and Industry Researcher,
involving a six-year research project designed to assist New Zealand
organisations to recover economic competitiveness after disasters and
hazard events by improving their resilience (refer
www.resorgs.org.nz).
Abstract
Using
Organisational Development approaches to engage managers and staff in
risk management communication, problem-solving and prioritisation
challenges.
This Seminar will outline the advantages of
adopting both a "hard" and a "soft" approach to risk management and
organisation resilience. The "soft" approach incorporates
organisation development techniques that facilitate organisational
thinking about risk processes, practices and culture. The
process
of engaging management and staff in 'Whole-Brained Thinking' about risk
will be also be outlined.
Many risk management programmes
fail because people do not engage in the process of understanding what
drives a risk management programme’s results. This is where
Organisation Development interventions can make a difference.
When teams understand these processes they are better able to address
risk, focusing on the right risk issues and approaching these risks
armed with the knowledge of which team members are best orientated to
succeed in rolling out different aspects of a risk management
programme.
In order to have an effective, culture-changing, successful Risk
Management Programme, organisations need to understand:
1. The importance of engaging their Managers’ and staff’s
thinking about risk.
2.
The power of survey-guided feedback in starting an organisation risk
management improvement programme that makes a difference.
Failure to
engage people in the organisation in a process of thinking about risk,
limits risk management programme success. There are numerous
instances where organisations still fail to understand how to make a
risk management programme successful. Survey-guided
feedback offers one way to achieve this.
Survey-guided feedback used
together with a Whole-Brained Approach to risk management offers the
opportunity to address risk assessment results on a range of dimensions
according to individual and team thinking preferences and
profiles.
In organisations that are familiar with the
Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI) as a tool to assist the
understanding of thinking preferences, both individually and within
teams, there is now an opportunity to enhance risk thinking and
awareness into our everyday work routines, be they the planning orspeakers.html#top
reviewing of risk processes related to our operations or challenges
related to serving our customers.
Addressing the risk management
culture, processes and practices in organisations starts with the risk
management thinking. Engaging people in survey-guided
feedback
and problem-solving processes builds engagement and a commitment to
integrate the new risk management awareness with business issues on a
daily, weekly and longer-term basis. Communicating the risk
management vision, objectives, opportunities and threats is fundamental
to achieving the desired results organisationally.
Back to top
|
|
Geraint
Bermingham
Geraint's
passion for managing risk in high-risk environments is demonstrated by
a career that has included a range of risk management roles within what
could reasonably be described as 'high risk' environments.
These
have included membership of the safety management committee of Europe’s
largest industrial site, under-ice nuclear submarine operations,
aircraft carrier flight deck operations, and more recently operational
risk, BCP and Internal Audit roles with a national airline.
Although the military have a aggressive focus on success - mission
success - Geraint says that it is his time with Air New Zealand -
during a time of recovery and growth - that really focused his thoughts
on how risk management must actively add value within broad and dynamic
contexts and be about achieving future success just as much as avoiding
failure.
As a member of the Joint Australian/New
Zealand committee responsible for AS/NZS4360:2004 and as a New Zealand
delegate on the committee recently tasked with the development
of
the first international standard on risk management (ISO31000), Geraint
is well ware of current risk management theory practice.
However,
his experiences have led to a view that the current 'best practice'
risk management methodologies, as described by current standards, are
focused on avoiding risk in the present context and may not be suited
to organisations and societies that wish to succeed and
prosper
despite the rapid pace of change and in particular the high level
of uncertainty regarding the future world.
Geraint and
Nick, will be discussing the concept of 'future space' and how, to be
meaningful and valuable to organisations that wish to succeed in the
the 21st century, risk management theory and practice must change.
Seminar 2 - Risk Management: A 20th Century Concept that?s Out of Time?
Risk
management must be about seeing into the future, and yet despite the
increasingly rapid march of change the concept of foresight is not
mentioned in the established standards on risk management. This paper
explores ?future space? as a concept that organisations must seriously
consider and how the concept of foresight will need to be adopted as
part of strategic thinking in order to survive and prosper in the 21st
Century.
|
|
Wendy
McGuinness CA, BCom, MBA
Wendy
McGuinness is the Chief Executive of Sustainable Future, a
non-partisan, not-for-profit research organisation specialising in
issues affecting New Zealand. Currently, Sustainable Future is working
on a two year project called Project 2058; the purpose of which is to
develop a strategy for New Zealand’s long-term future. Sustainable
Future hopes establishing this strategy will add to the dialogue around
the promotion of integrated long-term thinking, leadership and
capacity-building so that New Zealand can effectively explore and
manage risks and opportunities over the next 50 years.
Wendy is
also a chartered accountant specialising in risk management. Throughout
her career, Wendy has been involved in many roles with the NZ Institute
of Chartered Accountants. She currently sits on the boards of the
Katherine Mansfield Birthplace Trust, Sustainable Aotearoa New Zealand
(SANZ), and the Natural Step, as well as being a member of the Victoria
University Commerce and Administration Advisory Group.
Seminar
2
Wendy
McGuinness - New Zealand in the Year 2058
Applying
the 'concept of foresight', Sustainable Future explores the long term
future of New Zealand. Drawing on material from Project 2058 and
insights gained at the recent World Futures Conference in Washington DC
, Wendy McGuinness shares the results of research to date, which
includes outlining four scenarios and discussing a preliminary strategy
that is intended to weather all storms and postion New Zealand well for
an exciting and robust future.
Back to top
|
|
Grant
Purdy
Grant
Purdy is an associate Director of Broadleaf Capital International and
has specialised in the practical application of risk management for
over 32 years.
He is a recognised expert on enterprise risk
management and the tactics for the take-up, customisation and embedding
of ‘bespoke’ risk management frameworks and systems. Until recently
Grant led the Group Risk Management team at BHP Billiton that created
the Enterprise-wide Risk Management framework which is recognized as
world best practice.
Grant is Chairman of the Australian and New
Zealand Risk Management Committee responsible for AS/NZS 4360. He also
the nominated expert representing Australia on the ISO Working Group
that has written ISO 31000 and the associated vocabulary for risk
management (Guide 73).
|
 |
Commissioner
Howard Broad
New
Zealand Police
Seminar 3
Howard
Broad has been the Commissioner of Police since April 2006.
Prior
to his appointment he held posts as an Assistant Commissioner
responsible for planning, performance and deployment, a secondment to
the United Kingdom Home Office, and as District Commander for the
Auckland City Police District.
The
Commissioner's
career began as a Police Cadet in 1975 and has since travelled through
general police duties, criminal investigation and various command and
administrative functions.
In his career
he has had a wide range of operational challenges including the
investigation of serious crime, governance over a particularly busy
metropolitan police district for five years, and the protection of a
number of visiting heads of state including the President of the United
States during Apec 99. He has a strong developmental focus
and
has been involved in making improvements in police operational
practice, intelligence, planning, responding to diversity,
and
executive management processes.
He holds the
Diploma in New Zealand Policing, and the degree Bachelor of Laws
(VUW). He is a barrister and solicitor of the High Court of
New
Zealand. He has certificates in police management from the
United
States and Canada.
In his private life he
enjoys reading, gardening, watching sport and the visual arts.
Talking
and Listening about Policing Risks
Good
policing means managing risk well. An important part of
managing
risk is to communicate and consult effectively. Senior
members of
the NZ Police have devoted a lot of effort to establish an effective
risk management framework. This framework is used as the
basis
for the setting of priorities and allocation of resources. it
also informs and validates communication strategies internally and
externally.
|
 |
Howard
Pharo
BVSc,
MSc (TAD), MACVSc, MPP
Seminar 3
Since
2002, Howard Pharo has been Team Manager of the MAF Biosecurity New
Zealand animals risk analysis unit, responsible for carrying out and
supervising import risk analyses on a range of requests to import
animals and animal products. This was preceded by 8 years working in a
number of animal health roles in MAF since 1994. Prior to joining MAF,
Howard spent 18 years working in various roles on a number of tropical
agricultural development projects in Asia.
Managing
risk in trade in animals, plants, and their products: decision-making
and risk communication in the face of scientific uncertainty.
The
management of biosecurity risks posed by international trade of
animals, plants and their products between WTO members is governed by
the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement of the World Trade
Organisation, the underlying premise of which is that trade should be
permitted to flow freely unless the goods pose an unacceptable risk to
the health of plants, animals or humans. Under the SPS agreement the
application of risk management measures to imported goods must be
justified by a scientific assessment of risks, and measures must be
applied only to the extent necessary to manage the identified risks.
The New Zealand legal framework for implementing the SPS agreement is
the Biosecurity Act (1993). The presentation examines the practical
application of this framework and concludes that neither the scientific
assessment of risks nor the risk-reduction effect of safeguards can be
as objective as seems to have been envisaged by the architects of the
SPS agreement. It is concluded that although specific scientific
expertise is necessary for the assessment of biosecurity risks, it may
not be enough to answer the question “how safe is safe enough?”
particularly when strong opposing views are held by different
stakeholder groups. Risk communication in such an environment poses
particular challenges. MAF BNZ’s risk analyses are produced following a
thorough process that includes external expert scientific review and
public consultation. Draft risk analyses that present risk management
options are released for public consultation prior to finalising
options. Decisions on final import conditions take into account all
matters raised in submissions, including uncertainty in the underlying
science. The recent amendment to the Biosecurity Act (1993) provides
for the Director-General of MAF to appoint an independent panel to
examine substantive differences of opinion regarding scientific
evidence that arise during consultation.
Back to top
|
 |
Karen
Price – Partner, ChanceryGreen - Environment Law and Strategy
Seminar
4
Karen
is a partner with specialty environment law firm
ChanceryGreen.
She specialises in integrated risk management, major infrastructure
projects and climate change. Her interest in climate change
was
sparked with a 1990 thesis on climate change, which led to Karen
attending the first Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change in 1991
as part of the New Zealand negotiating team.
Karen
negotiated the only two concluded Negotiated Greenhouse Agreements with
the Crown, and has facilitated securitisation and trading in carbon
credits on international markets for various
clients. She
advises a range of clients on their New Zealand Emission Trading Scheme
obligations, international carbon trading opportunities and on
corporate offsetting exercises.
Karen is also a
co-director of NZCX Ltd, a carbon broker. NZCX brokers
emission
unit trades both domestically and internationally. With its
partner CanterCO2e (the world’s largest carbon broker) NZCX offers
Australasian buyers and sellers unparalleled access globally.
Emissions
Trading Contracts – Buyers Beware
Emissions
trading is now a necessity for those participants with binding
obligations under the NZ emissions trading legislation (NZ
ETS).
The NZ ETS also presents opportunities for other individuals and
entities to enter the market and engage in trading if they wish to do
so. But how do you effect a trade in these new carbon
markets?
What are the risks - now and in the future? What factors do parties
need to be aware of when entering contracts to sell or acquire
emissions units? And what can your business do to protect its
interests? We will discuss the basic carbon market trading
mechanisms, key market participants and address critical issues that
parties must be wary off when entering into contracts for carbon units.
In addition to obligations under the NZ ETS (which will
not take effect over all sectors until 2013), voluntary carbon
offsetting has also become an increasingly popular marketing tool
globally. ‘Carbon neutrality’ and ‘sustainability’ claims must however
be rigorously assessed to avoid ‘greenwash’ and allegations of
misleading marketing. While the validity of carbon neutrality
claims is important for any robust marketing campaign from a public
relations perspective, legal implications may also come to the fore if
claims are found to be misleading consumers. The Commerce
Commission is expected to take a more active role in assessing the
validity of ‘green’ claims in the future – as has been the
case
for consumer and competition regulators in overseas jurisdictions. This
session will discuss critical factors to be considered when making
carbon neutrality claims in the public arena, and trading risks
associated with particular carbon reduction projects.
|
 |
Leah
Murphy
Seminar 4
Leah
Murphy is a senior advisor in the Ministry of Transports Environmental
Sustainability team and is also a part time member of the Emissions
Trading Group at the Treasury. She was a fulltime member of
the
Emissions Trading Group during 2007. She has played
a key
role in designing how the emissions trading scheme will be implemented
for the transport sector and is the secretariat for the Transport Fuels
Technical Advisory Group. This group was established in early
2008 to advise the government on the technical aspects of emissions
monitoring.
Leah was previously the Enabling Biofuels
Project Managerfor the Ministry of Transport and was a member of the
Climate Change Implementation Team at the Ministry for the Environment.
During her time at the Ministry for the Environment her focus was on
the design of the previously announced carbon tax and Negotiated
Greenhouse Agreements. Leah has a graduate diploma in environmental
management from Auckland University and is a chartered Accountant with
a private sector financial accounting and tax background.
The
Good Oil on Emissions Trading
The
New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme has been developed as an economic
instrument to assist with the management of New Zealand’s contribution
to the global challenge in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
It
has recently passed into law. We will look back on
developments
since initial policy announcements in September 2007 through to
enactment in September 2008. Key characteristics of the
emissions
trading scheme will be provided. Well established
emissions
trading practices and unique features will be drawn out and
explained. How the concepts of carbon neutrality and the
voluntary market are distinguished from the compliance market (i.e.
emissions trading scheme) will be clarified.
A
case study of an oil company will be used to elaborate on stakeholder
involvement in ETS policy development to date and what the passing of
the bill means for the company internally and
externally.
Internal considerations will include emission source monitoring and
emission unit purchasing; external considerations will include annual
reporting and data collection requirements as well as the consequences
of non-compliance. Risks and opportunities will be
highlighted.
Back to top
|
|
